True, the distinction is though, if you are walking across the playground no one drags you forcibly into the game.In ED terms thats 'revenge'
Pretty sure the big kids didn't play with the little kids either, well they didn't at my school.
Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking
- Thread starter Hole in Head
- Start date
Pretty sure the big kids didn't play with the little kids either, well they didn't at my school.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Was playing catch compulsory?
.... or did each child in the playground choose to participate?
I suspect it was the latter - in which case it is highly likely that not all residents of the playground were playing chase.
Last edited:
Not sure I agree here: the fact that opne mode is more 'alive' is in itself a benefit, it's up to the players to make good use of it, and it's that point of view that has partly created an opposing force that would like to castrate open mode by restricting any PvP content to another dedicate mode or separate systems in the galaxy.
I was joking and pointing out I NEVER play anywhere but in open
Be classy and let us get on with it?Hey CMDRs, be classy and stop doing the same debate over and over again with the same arguments? There could be danger of appearing ridiculous.
Well, OK.
I don't think it should be as simple as that, especially since some activities are completely mode-ambiguous.
Like, for BGS purposes, navigation data is irrelevant which mode you gather it in. Even if you explore in open and forgo being able to take high-res screenshots, your odds of encountering another player in some random system out in the black are negligible. The odds of that player being hostile and not just another explorer doing their thing are even smaller, and the odds of them actually being your BGS opponents that won't want you selling that data weeks down the line are practically infinitesimal.
Likewise, long range sightseeing missions. I'd go so far as to say that any of the mission types that have a default timer of over 24 hours or send you more than 20ly away should be exempted from any "fighting against ghosts" concerns since all the work is going to be done where you couldn't feasably stop them from doing so anyway regardless of whether they're in open or private.
Honestly the only time I'd even consider mode to be relevant to the BGS for a particular system is the combat-related transactions since someone doing those has to actually hang around in the system of interest for more than the time it takes to make a supecruise dash from the star to the station, and even then I wouldn't give buffs to people merely for flying in open, because "open" doesn't mean much outside the core systems or where you're not being opposed.
Like... the last week or so? I'm in open. The only ships that showed up on the traffic reports in the system I've been working on were my own. One station I went to for a delivery didn't have a traffic report. Whether I'd been there in open, solo, mobius, what time zone I was in, whether I have a blocklist, whether anyone else has me on their blocklist, all those things are completely irrelevant as I wouldn't have met any opposition anyway - why should I get a buff to my transactions? Imagine it, I could find some low-traffic systems and do a drive-by murderspree in each one and get a bigger swing than I'd have managed to get in an equally empty solo mode - that doesn't sound balanced to me.
If I was to suggest any kind of weighting at all in favour of open or penalising solo/private, I'd limit it only to combat actions, and even then I'd scale the weighting to the number of actions carried out in each mode - for instance, if every transaction in a given system for a day takes place in solo/private, then it doesn't matter what mode they were in, they count in full. If, on the other hand, transactions took place in both open and solo/private, then I can see an argument for scaling them according to the ratio between the two. (ie. if there are 99 actions in private and 1 in open, then barely any scaling is applied - if it's closer to 50/50 then open would be favoured)
Griefing isn't anything like playing catch. Griefing is the guy we excluded from the game coming back insisting to play with us when noone wants to play with them anymore.
There is a problem, well more than one, with offering bonus's for simply playing in open. That would give an extra reward for accepting a greater risk of the possibly of being destroyed. I say reward a player for completing a PvP encounter, not just for being randomly available.
The 'danger' of playing in open is completely under the control of each Commander.
That said, open has no more claim to the game's features than Solo or PG. Everyone who plays E|D paid for access, everyone deserves the same rewards.
The 'danger' of playing in open is completely under the control of each Commander.
That said, open has no more claim to the game's features than Solo or PG. Everyone who plays E|D paid for access, everyone deserves the same rewards.
Yeah, the only time you could even consider it remotely relevant is when it's activities that are directly opposed by their very nature. The vast majority of systems are just as safe/empty in open as they are in solo, there's no inherent extra risk to flying in them.
Yes, I agree. In fact I'm not even convinced that PP in open should have rewards.
I think time would be better spent on general balancing and improvements to the C&P system so that PvP has more meaningful expression in terms of roleplay.
I agree. Though the metaphor was made in relation to piracy, not griefing.
I think you can apply that to piracy too. In the end it's in the eye of the beholder what they consider griefing. Having someone trying to leech from you all the time I would consider at least "annoying".
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The question is "is it fun for both parties" - if it's not then that's where the issue arises. Fun sponges (who hog all the fun for themselves) aren't much fun to play with.
I disagree with all of this, except that very first sentience, which is both a given and irrelevant.
But you can't always tell that shieldless Corvette is just a PvP loadout with the shield gen, boosters, and SCBs replaced with cargo racks; that it still has it's 6k hull, and is piloted by someone who knows what they are doing.
I'm not sure what part of pulling people over for small chance at getting a meager pittance from them, rather than spending half the time and effort getting a handout that is an order of magnitude higher from the local hotspot, makes much sense in the slightest within the context of any setting.
I don't have any problem with players that choose to play pirate CMDRs, but I cannot honestly sa
I played a lot of dodge rock as a kid and am better off for it!
Ignoring or harming PvP in game design is contributing to ganking
Which means ironically you already have an Open PvE mode then, rather than one that has consequences for actions. Not at all - player damage is a thing in Open.
I refer you to this post I made which you have yet to acknowledge which respond to this.
I was talking about pirating, not people who grief though.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The post was not in reply to a post of mine - hence no acknowledgement.
It's also subjective - I'm glad that you enjoy the frisson, which can't be said of all players.